[Rubygems-developers] Name collisions (Help me avoid hate mail while using descriptive names)

[Eric Hodel]

On 04 Jun 2005, at 17:30, Eric Hodel wrote:

> On 04 Jun 2005, at 17:10, Eric Hodel wrote:
>
>> Last night I uploaded rails_analyzer_tools (and rails-analyzer- 
>> tools, which gave inconsistent names to the other packages...) and  
>> now "rails-analyzer-tools" gets installed instead of "rails" when  
>> I "gem install rails":
>>
>> I'd like to keep the name 'rails_analyzer_tools', but at the same  
>> time I don't want to get any hate-mail from Rails fanboys because  
>> they now have to specify a version to get rails.
>>
>> I thought something had been done about this exact vs relative  
>> matching thing, but I'm too lazy to crawl through the archives in  
>> search of it.
>
> Ok, looking at the sources, I see what the problem is that exact  
> name search is never done.  I will try to whip up some test cases  
> and a patch.

I now have a proposed patch, the heart of which is this:

Index: lib/rubygems/remote_installer.rb
===================================================================
RCS file: /var/cvs/rubygems/rubygems/lib/rubygems/remote_installer.rb,v
retrieving revision 1.80
diff -u -r1.80 remote_installer.rb
--- lib/rubygems/remote_installer.rb    24 Mar 2005 05:37:36  
-0000      1.80
+++ lib/rubygems/remote_installer.rb    5 Jun 2005 01:30:11 -0000
@@ -425,36 +425,44 @@
      # Find a gem to be installed by interacting with the user.
      def find_gem_to_install(gem_name, version_requirement, caches)
-      max_version = Version.new("0.0.0")
        specs_n_sources = []
+
        caches.each do |source, cache|
          cache.each do |name, spec|
-          if (/^#{gem_name}-/i === name &&
-             version_requirement.satisfied_by?(spec.version))
+          if /^#{gem_name}$/i === spec.name &&
+             version_requirement.satisfied_by?(spec.version) then
              specs_n_sources << [spec, source]
            end
          end
        end

(The full patch does much more cleanup, because the method was  
completely unreadable.)

So...

$ gem install foo

Will install "foo-1.2.3"

In the presence of:

foo-1.2.3
foo-tools-2.0.0
foo-2-2.0.0 # if the regex is /#{gem_name}-\d/ this gets installed  
instead of foo.

But I have a funny feeling about this:

-      if specs_n_sources.reject { |item|
-         item[0].platform.nil? || item[0].platform==Platform::RUBY
-       }.size == 0
-        # only non-binary gems...return latest
-        return specs_n_sources.first
+
+      non_binary_gems = specs_n_sources.reject { |item|
+        item[0].platform.nil? || item[0].platform==Platform::RUBY
+      }
+
+      # only non-binary gems...return latest
+      return specs_n_sources.first if non_binary_gems.empty?
+

Why are non-binary gems special?

-- 
Eric Hodel - drbrain at segment7.net - http://segment7.net
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E  7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04